Jeff Davis <pg...@j-davis.com> wrote: > It's OK to leave it to 9.2. But if it's a RO deferrable > transaction, it's just going to go to sleep in that case anyway; > so why not look for an opportunity to get a safe snapshot right > away? If you're talking about doing this only for DEFERRABLE transactions it *might* make sense for 9.1. I'd need to look at what's involved. We make similar checks for all read only transactions, so they can withdraw from SSI while running, if their snapshot *becomes* safe. I don't think I'd want to consider messing with that code at this point. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
